apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Branko ─îibej <br...@xbc.nu>
Subject Re: iconv - mistake #27?
Date Sun, 09 Oct 2005 22:28:05 GMT
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

> Brad Nicholes wrote:
>>    I guess I don't understand what the point of dropping xlate would be.
>>  We already have httpd modules that depend on it (mod_charset_lite,
>> mod_auth_ldap).  Are you proposing that we would have to rip the xlate
>> support from those modules as well?
> Some of our 'util' wrappers turn out to accomplish very little, yet they
> introduce additional dependencies (in this case an LGPL dependency, on
> some platforms).  But consider the value; apr_dbm gives us useful
> flexibility and independence from any specific db store/library.
> apr_ldap wraps out all the peculiar quirks of four or five ldap library
> providers.  apr_xlate?
> If we drop xlate, obviously those modules could directly consume iconv -
> that would be the choice of the httpd project.

Do I smell an "APR == Apache *HTTPD* Portable Library" rat again?

apr_xlate hides the differences between apr_iconv and "ordinary" iconv. 
Subversion for one relies on having this abstraction layer.

If anyone's worried about (L)GPL'd iconv being pulled into their 
oh-so-proprietary APR-based binaries, then by all means use apr-iconv on 
Unixen, too. It's supposed to work, isn't it?

-- Brane

View raw message